Table Of ContentThe Implementation of the EU Services Directive
Ulrich Stelkens Wolfgang Weiß
•
Michael Mirschberger
Editors
The Implementation
of the EU Services
Directive
Transposition, Problems and Strategies
123
Ulrich Stelkens Michael Mirschberger
GermanResearch Institute forPublic GermanResearch Institute forPublic
Administration Speyer Administration Speyer
GermanUniversity ofAdministrative Freiherr-vom-Stein-Straße 2
Sciences Speyer 67324Speyer
Freiherr-vom-Stein-Straße 2 Germany
67324Speyer
Germany
Wolfgang Weiß
GermanResearch Institute forPublic
Administration Speyer
GermanUniversity ofAdministrative
Sciences Speyer
Freiherr-vom-Stein-Straße 2
67324Speyer
Germany
ISBN 978-90-6704-839-2 e-ISBN978-90-6704-840-8
DOI 10.1007/978-90-6704-840-8
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2011946236
(cid:2)T.M.C.ASSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlands,andtheauthor(s)2012
PublishedbyT.M.C.ASSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlandswww.asserpress.nl
ProducedanddistributedforT.M.C. ASSERPRESSbySpringer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorby
anymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,recordingorotherwise,withoutwritten
permissionfromthePublisher,withtheexceptionofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurpose
ofbeingenteredandexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,etc.inthispublicationdoesnot
imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Preface
TheServicesDirectiveisone ofthe mostrecent cornerstones inthe realisationof
theinternalmarketandhasattractedalotofattentionbothfromthegeneralpublic
andfromeconomicandlegalexperts,inpartduetotheconsiderableshareservices
contributetotheGDPoftheMemberStates.TheServicesDirectivewasoneofthe
subjects of the 2008 FIDE congress. After quite a long period of deliberation and
legislation and heated debates, including between and within European institu-
tions,itwasfinallyadoptedin2006andwastobetransposedintodomesticlawby
theendof2009.Thisbookpresentedhereisanattempttotakestockoftheimpact
the Services Directive had on the national administrative regulations of the
Member States now that the transposition period is over and the Member States
haveforthemostparttransposedtheexigenciesofthedirectiveintotheirdomestic
rules.
ThisvolumeonthelegalimplementationoftheServicesDirectiveistheresult
of the collective endeavour of the participants of a Europe-wide legal research
project conducted by the editors under the umbrella of the German Research
Institute for Public Administration Speyer (Deutsches Forschungsinstitut für
Öffentliche Verwaltung Speyer; [http://www.foev-speyer.de/EU-DLR]). It will
firstofallexplainandanalyseindetailthedifferentstepstakenbyeachindividual
Member State in the implementation process of the directive, thus not only pro-
viding information about the changes in national law adopted by the Member
States (which is good to have for anyone interested in doing business within
the EU), but also allowing for a comparison of the different implementation
strategies applied by the Member States. Beyond that, it will allow certain basic
conclusions to be drawn from this comparison as regards the heterogeneity or
homogeneityofimplementationconceptsandthevaryingimpactthattheServices
Directive has had on national services regulations, in particular the relevant
administrativerules.Onecanobserve,forexample,thatsomeMemberStatesused
the transposition to implement far reaching alterations of domestic administrative
law and intensely modernise the citizen-state/public administration relationship,
whereas others made reforms only where absolutely demanded by the Services
Directive. The Services Directive shows how European legislation touches even
v
vi Preface
those fields of legislation originally nationally dominated, such as the law of
national administration. The volume will also illustrate, by taking the Services
Directiveasanexample,whichbasicproblemsarisewhenEuropeanlawinterferes
with established domestic administrative structures and national legislative/dog-
maticconceptsandtraditionsinadministrativelawaswellashowdeeptheimpact
oftheEuropeanlegislationcanbeindifferentadministrativetraditionsinEurope.
Thus, this implementation study hopes to raise the awareness of European insti-
tutions regarding the specific conditions and problems in the different national
transposition contexts, all the more so since EU law after the Lisbon Treaty is
often seen as demanding greater respect for fundamental national structures and
different legal traditions (allegedly derived from Art. 4 (2) TEU). Analysing and
comparing the national transpositions of the EU Member States also allow veri-
fying whether the expectations of the European Commission for cooperation
between the Member States in their implementation endeavours and for the
development of common examples of best practice have finally been met. If so,
this implementation study could form a starting point for further research with
regardtothequestionofwhichadministrativetraditionandconceptioncoulddrive
Europeaninstitutionsintheirlegislativeprocesses,atleastasregardstheServices
Directive.
The aforementioned project started in August/September 2009 with the estab-
lishment of the expert network and ended in September 2010. Most reports,
therefore, reflect the national situation regarding the implementation process
aroundJuly2010intherespectiveMemberState,thoughsomehavebeenupdated
sincethen.Theresearchprojectwasinspiredbythedifficultiesinthetransposition
process in Germany and by the approach finally adopted by German legislators,
which saw the transposition used to initiate ground breaking reforms of core
administrative laws in Germany, driven by an awareness of the need for mod-
ernisation that went well beyond the requirements of the directive. In order to
ensure a common research focus and that the same questions were addressed the
participants were provided with a detailed questionnaire to guide their enquiry.
Thisquestionnaireandtheassociatedexplanationsareincludedasanannextothe
general comparative report.
Initially the volume intended to gather the national reports on the implemen-
tationresultsoftheServicesDirectiveinall27EUMemberStatesandthendraw
comparative conclusions on the research questions alluded to above. However,
during the project period there were some changes as regards the participation of
legal experts from some countries. In the end, the only Member State of the
EuropeanUnionthatisunfortunatelymissinginthisvolumeisGreece.Duetothe
current crises in Greece there are several problems in its public administration/
sector, hence our participants could not provide a final version of the implemen-
tation of the Services Directive for this publication. This is very disappointing
for us, but we still can provide an overview of the other 26 Member States. The
volume profits not only from the expertise of each contributor about his/her
national jurisdiction but also from an intensive exchange of views and common
analysis of the similarities and differences in the implementation processes which
Preface vii
took place at a symposium in Speyer in April 2010. This symposium was kindly
supported by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (http://www.fritz-thyssen-stiftung.de),
for which we would like to extend our thanks once again.
We finally would like to thank all the participants for their willingness to take
part in this research and to redraft their reports several times due to new devel-
opments in the implementation process. Furthermore, we thank the German
Research Institute for Public Administration Speyer for their contribution to the
funding of the research. Moreover, we thank Hanna Schröder, LL.M. and Olivia
Seifert, Ass. Jur., for their excellent help at the symposium. Furthermore,
we would like to thank Marion Pfundstein for her valuable support at the sym-
posium and during the whole book project.
July 2011 The Editors
Contents
Part I Comparative Perspective
General Comparative Report on the Research Project
‘The Implementation of the Services Directive in the EU
Member States’ of the German Research Institute
for Public Administration Speyer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Ulrich Stelkens, Wolfgang Weiß and Michael Mirschberger
Part II Country Reports
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Austria. . . . . . . . . . . 65
Georg Adler and Thomas Kröll
Implementation of the Services Directive in Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Alexandre Geulette
Implementation of the Services Directive in the Republic
of Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Hristo Ilkov Hristev
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Cyprus. . . . . . . . . . . 127
Chrystalla Neophytou
Implementation of the Services Directive in the Czech Republic. . . . . 139
Filip Krˇepelka
Implementation of the Services Directive in Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Michael Gøtze
ix
x Contents
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Estonia. . . . . . . . . . . 181
Carri Ginter
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Finland . . . . . . . . . . 191
Lauri Railas
The Implementation of the Services Directive in France. . . . . . . . . . . 209
Marie Gautier Melleray and Marion Ho-Dac
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Germany . . . . . . . . . 225
Michael Mirschberger
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Hungary . . . . . . . . . 283
Anita Boros
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Ireland. . . . . . . . . . . 309
John Biggins and Catherine Donnelly
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Italy. . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
Simone Torricelli
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Latvia . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Agris Repšs and Valts Nerets
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Lithuania. . . . . . . . . 379
Danguole_ Bubliene_ and Skirgaile_ Zˇalimiene_
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Luxembourg. . . . . . . 407
Aurélie Melchior
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Malta. . . . . . . . . . . . 425
Peter G. Xuereb
The Implementation of the Services Directive in the Netherlands . . . . 435
Sacha Prechal, Sybe de Vries and Frederik van Doorn
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Poland. . . . . . . . . . . 475
Piotr Stec and Przemysław Malinowski
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Portugal. . . . . . . . . . 493
Miguel Gorjão-Henriques
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Romania . . . . . . . . . 513
Dacian C. Dragos and Bogdana Neamtu
Contents xi
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Slovakia. . . . . . . . . . 545
Silvia Rucˇinská and Miroslav Fecˇko
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Slovenia. . . . . . . . . . 557
Rajko Knez
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Spain. . . . . . . . . . . . 573
Marta Franch and Joan Torrelles
The Implementation of the Services Directive in Sweden . . . . . . . . . . 589
Gunilla Edelstam
The Implementation of the Services Directive
in the United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633
Martin Trybus and Almuth Berger
